reducing ghg in uranium and potash mining: 2030-2040

52
PRESCOUTER Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040 IMII & PreScouter March 19 th , 2021 Research Support Service Prepared for: IMII Al Shpyth April Dent Prepared by: PreScouter Christian Salles Jorge Hurtado Yutzil Castan Srilakshmi Gopal Dusica Radjenovic Mohammed Shafi

Upload: others

Post on 12-May-2022

6 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

PRESCOUTER

Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

IMII & PreScouter

March 19th, 2021

Research Support Service

Prepared for: IMIIAl ShpythApril Dent

Prepared by: PreScouterChristian SallesJorge HurtadoYutzil CastanSrilakshmi GopalDusica RadjenovicMohammed Shafi

Page 2: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Project Goal

2

General

One of the objectives of the International Minerals Innovation Institute (IMII) is to help its members to reducegreenhouse gas emissions. For that matter, IMII is looking to understand which technologies and strategiesmight be leveraged in the next 10 or 20 years to pursue previously mentioned goal, and in particular forPotash and Uranium Mining.

PreScouter started with a broad focus identifying the different strategies or technologies for decarbonizingprocesses related to potash and uranium mining and then, with industry input, did a deeper dive into themost promising technologies/developments.

The overall goal of this engagement was to identify areas where IMII could start projects to developtechnologies to reduce emissions for their members’ operations within the specified time framework.

Page 3: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Approach

3

MEETING 2MEETING 1 MEETING 3 MEETING 4 MEETING 5 MEETING 6

Deep dive into selected areas

Industry Subject Matter Expert: insights and

validation

Areas (and people / institutions) for projects for technology development identified

Technology Scouting:• General: cost, efficiencies, scale,

GHG, etc.o 2020o 2030/2040

• Specific: examples of early stage promising developments

HydrogenConcentrated Solar Power

DECISION POINT

Small Modular Reactors

Salt Cavern Redox Batteries

Carbon CaptureThermal Energy

StorageUnderground

Pumped Hydro Storage

Page 4: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 4

Conditioning

● Concentrated Solar Power● Enhanced Geothermal Systems● Small Modular Reactors ● Solar thermal technology for drying

applications● Biomass Energy● Bioenergy with CC● Multirotor Systems Wind Turbines● Gas-Based Receiver

● Hydro Harvester Technology● High Stable Perovskite Solar

Modules

Energy Storage

● Hydrogen● Ammonia-Fueled Power Generation● Concentrated Photovoltaic ● Thermal System with combined

Hydrogen and MgO based storage● Thermal Energy Storage

● Molten Salt-Based Energy Storage● Liquid Air Storage● Underground Hydro Pumped Storage● Potassium Driven Rechargeable Battery● Air-based encapsulated phase change● Salt cavern Redox Batteries

Methods

● Carbon Capture ● Faradaic electro-swing reactive

adsorption● Nanosponges● MOF-based Mixed Matrix

Membranes● Direct CC from Air● Magnetohydrodynamic Power

Generation

Lowering emissions from fossil fuels

Technologies analyzed

16 General Developments (in bold the ones that received further study)

11 Specific Developments

Page 5: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 5

*plant capacities, higher TRL, are in the range of 49 to 660 MW

Biomass Energy*

** referred to one Turbine.Size (MW)

Log Scale

TRL

Liquid Air Energy Storage

Bioenergy CCS

Thermal Energy Storage

MRS** Wind Turbine

Gas

-bas

ed C

entr

al

Rece

iver

Solar Drying

Hydrogen

Enhanced Geothermal

Systems

Small Modular Reactor

Concentrated Solar Power

Carbon Capture***

Gas-based Central Receiver, Solar Drying, Liquid Air Energy Storage and H2 are at low scale and TRL today

Maturity and Scale - Today Generation Storage Conditioning

*** Goes to lower sizes too

Page 6: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Maturity and Scale - Forecast

3

Small Modular Reactor

Gas-based Central Receiver, Liquid Air Energy Storage and H2 are expected to increase scale in the next years.

*plant capacities, higher TRL, are in the range of 49 to 660 MW

Biomass Energy*

** referred to one Turbine.Size (MW)

TRL

Liquid Air Energy Storage

Bioenergy CCS

MRS** Wind Turbine

Gas

-bas

ed C

entr

al

Rece

iver

Solar Drying

Hydrogen

Enhanced Geothermal

Systems

Concentrated Solar Power

Carbon Capture***

2022

2030

2030

2030

Log Scale

Generation Storage Conditioning

Thermal Energy Storage

*** Goes to lower sizes too

Page 7: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Emissions and Costs

7

Enhanced Geothermal

Systems

Concentrated Solar Power

Solar Drying

Saskatchewan grid target 2030 for GHG and current

SK oil field rate

Cost (USD/kWh)

Carb

on F

ootp

rint (

gC0 2

eq/k

Wh)

WindMRS

Biomass Energy*

Bioenergy with CCS**

Thermal Energy Storage

Liquid Air Energy Storage

Gas-based Central

Receiver

Wind Energy shows the best compromise, only SMR, Bioenergy with CCS and LAES competing in GHG emissions

Generation Storage Conditioning

SMR 120 USD/kW

*Considered sometimes negative emissions too

Almost all technologies have higher costs than the grid today, which is inline with the high abatement cost ($150/tCO2) reportedin SK.Nevertheless, carbon taxes will make all of them competitive

Page 8: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Enhanced Geothermal

Systems

Small Modular Reactor

Concentrated Solar Power

Solar Drying

Saskatchewan grid target 2030 for GHG and current

SK oil field rate

Cost (USD/kWh)

Carb

on F

ootp

rint (

gC0 2

eq/k

Wh)

Wind MRS

Biomass Energy*

Bioenergy with CCS**

Thermal Energy Storage

Liquid Air Energy Storage

Gas-based Central

Receiver

Emissions and Costs - Forecast

4

With the exception ofTES, the expectation is that in the next 5-10 years, majority should be close to the $0.05/kWh mark

Generation Storage Conditioning

90 USD/kW

Page 9: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Short list of technologies for deeper study

9

To select the most promising technologies to make a deeper analysis, the following aspects wereconsidered:

• Fulfilment with initial criteria: mature in the next 10-20 years ability to lower current emission levels• Applicability to Mining activities and Geographical Region (in some cases to be determined)• Insights from 4 (four) Subject Matter Experts with combined ~100 years of experience in transitioning

to low GHG emission technologies• Discussion and Feedback from industry members after three rounds of research

The selected areas for further research were:

1. Hydrogen Ecosystem

2. Small Modular Reactors

3. Carbon Capture

4. Concentrated Solar Power

5. Redox Salt Cavern Batteries (RSCB)

6. Underground Hydro Pumped Storage (UHPS)7. Thermal Energy Storage

Conclusion: not suitable for the region (link)

Conclusion: potentially applicable based on resources in thearea but very few players (EWE group in Germany andChongqing University in China for RSCB and JolTech ApS -now dissolved- and Quidnet Energy in the US for UHPS) anddata points at this point of development

Conclusion: potentially applicable but cost range is too broad(0.1-30 $/kWh) for a general conclusion (link) → specificassessment based on type of heat and technologies shouldbe considered

Page 10: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Hydrogen Ecosystem

10

Page 11: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 11

Overview

Hydrogen has many uses in the mining industry such as generating high-temperature heat, power,feedstock, fuel for transportation and other mining equipment, and energy storage. Nonetheless,Hydrogen production is currently dominated by reforming natural gas, coal and oil (GreyHydrogen). There is however, an unprecedented political and business momentum to produce”Green Hydrogen”, which is produced mainly by electrolysis [1].

Applicability: Heat, steam, power, feedstock, fuel for transportation, and energy storage

TRL: 6-8

Cost Green hydrogen: $4-$6/Kg (2020) - $1.2-$1.8/Kg (2030)

Carbon Footprint:

The most used type of Hydrogen (Grey) has a footprint of > 36.4 gCO₂/MJ. Green Hydrogen has a footprint of < 36.4 gCO₂/MJ

Scale: 1-2MW (2020) and 90-100 MW (2030) Hurdles: Require significant efforts to be cost effective. Requires renewable energies for electrolysis to become Green Hydrogen. Carbon footprint could be higher compared to Li-ion batteries.

Advantages: Besides transportation applications, hydrogen can be used for electricity, heat and steam generating, as well as feedstock and even energy storage (potentially bigger scale than Li-ion batteries)

At a

gla

nce

Hydrogen

Page 12: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 12

Scale

The current systems support 1-2MW, to achieve a competitive renewable hydrogen fromelectrolysis production requires about 70 GW of cumulative electrolyser capacity to be deployedover the next decade (figure below), with an implied economic gap to cover of roughly USD 20billion. [6].

Hydrogen

Page 13: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Green H2

Hydrogen Technologies Overview

13

Blue H2

AELTRL 9Capacity: 0.05-5 MWCost: $3/kgEmission: 2.2- 2.6 kgCO₂/kgH

Alternative H2 generation

Chlor Alkali systemsTRL 6 - 7

SOECTRL 6 -7Capacity: 0.1 - 2.6MWCost: ~ as PEMEmission: 3.2 kgCO₂/kgH2

Anion Exchange MembranesTRL 6 - 7

PEMTRL 6 - 8,Capacity: 0.1 - 6MWCost: $4.7/kgEmission: 2.2- 2.6 kgCO₂/kgH

Coal gasificationTRL 5 (w/CC)

SMRTRL 8 - 9

Biomass gasification

ATRTRL 7 - 9

Partial oxidation Gasification

Pyrolysis of hydrocarbonsTRL 6)

Depleted well gasification (Proton Energy)

Microwave technology

Thermochemical water splittingTRL 3-5Cost: $2.5/kgEmission: 0.5 kgCO₂/kgH

Photobiological water splittingTRL 5Emission: 3.2 kgCO₂/kgH

AFCCapacity: 1 - 100 kWCAPEX: $1,200 - 3,000/kW PtP: $0.42/kWh

PAFCCapacity: 5 - 400 kW

PEMFC Capacity: <1 - 100 kWCAPEX: $2,320/kW PtP: $0.51/kWh

MCFCCapacity: 300 kW - 3 MW

SOFCCapacity: 1 kW - 2 MWCAPEX: $6,000/kW PtP: $1.06/kWh

Hydrogen Fuel Cells

Emerging technology

Mature technology

Emerging technology

Mature technology

Emerging technology

Mature technology

Page 14: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 14

Other Information

There are significant political and business efforts to bring green hydrogen as an alternativeenergy supplier.

Hydrogen

Key takeaways for IMII

This technology is being improved with the aim of replacing fossil fuels. Besides their popularproposed use in transportation, hydrogen can be seen as much more considering other uses suchas for electricity and heat generating as well as feedstock and even energy storage.

The study indicates that the electricity consumption during hydrogen production has thehighest environmental impact on the life cycle for PEM and SOEC. The high impact is dueto the large quantity of electricity used, together with the energy source (fossil vs RE). So,to reduce the GWP, the focus should be the source of electricity, rather than electrolyzertechnology comparisons. In addition, the conclusion from this study indicates that focusfor R&D, to achieve a good environmental result, should be to decrease the energyconsumption instead of focusing on decreasing the material weights or changing thematerial types in the electrolyzer design (especially for PEM which is mature already).

References:1. NREL. 2020.2. Hydrogen Europe.3. Standard Chartered. 2020.4. IEA. 2019.5. FCH JU CertifHy project.6. Hydrogen Council. 2020.7. Wood Mac. 2019.8. Coventry University. 2012.

Page 15: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 15

Overview

By definition, blue hydrogen refers to the hydrogen produced from fossil fuels while coupled toCCS technologies to decrease most of their GHG emissions. Most technologies have been widelydeveloped to produce gray H₂.

At a

gla

nce

Blue Hydrogen - General

Mature blue H₂technology 1

Steam Methane Reforming

Applicability well-known technology, additional CCS infrastructure increase significantly the total cost and decrease efficiency by 5%–14%.

Mature blue H₂technology 2

Coal gasification Applicability Mature technology but due to high carbon content of coal and energy intensity of the process, unlikely to be useful into the future.

Mature blue H₂technology 3

Biomass gasification

Applicability Wood, straw or waste can be used in gasification, process similar as using coal but the need for pre-treatment adds complexity and cost.

Mature blue H₂technology 4

Autothermal reforming

Advantage A standard production processes for syngas (H₂+CO), can be combined with SMR as a Combined Reforming.

Mature blue H₂technology 5

Partial oxidation Gasification

Advantage also produce syngas, operates at smaller scales, and has similar efficiencies as SMR and ATR

Page 16: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 16

Overview contd.

By definition, blue hydrogen refers to the hydrogen produced from fossil fuels while coupled toCCS technologies to decrease most of their GHG emissions. Most technologies have been widelydeveloped to produce gray H₂.

At a

gla

nce

Blue Hydrogen - General

Emerging blue H₂technology 1

Pyrolysis of hydrocarbons

Advantage Process heats the hydrocarbon to a high temperature without oxygen. The solid carbon could, once isolated and collected, be sequestered.

Hurdles Still under development, efficiency 35 - 50%

Emerging blue H₂technology 2

Underground coal gasification

Advantage To be used in conventional fossil fuel reservoirs. shale gas reservoirs offer the potential for hydrogen generation and release, coupled with CO₂ adsorption.

Hurdles Unknown reaction engineering and process under downhole conditions and detailed environmental considerations

Emerging blue H₂technology 3

Microwave technology

Advantage New, used with bespoke catalysts releases hydrogen from diesel and wax with purity >98%

Hurdles A source of low carbon electricity will be required.

Relevance to mining

Alberta in particular, and Canada in general are incentivizing the production of “blue H₂” aiming to serve city and industrial sectors. CO₂ emissions are about 23 - 180 gCO₂/kWh of H₂).

Page 17: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 17

Other Information

The Alberta Industrial Heartland is a potential hydrogen node. It is already a center for low costgrey (GHG emissions of about 9 kg CO₂/kg H₂) and blue (GHG emissions of about 1 kg CO₂/kg H₂)hydrogen production in Alberta. The hydrogen is primarily used as an industrial feedstock formaking nitrogen fertilizer, cracking bitumen to synthetic crude oil and making refined petroleumproducts. There is capacity and interest among industry and all levels of government to makemore blue hydrogen and use it as both an industrial feedstock and as a fuel to support heavytransport, space heating and other applications.

References:

1. The Royal Society (Link)2. IEA (Link)3. CESAR & University of Calgary (Link)4. UCSI University (Link)5. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (Link)6. Murdoch University (Link)

Blue Hydrogen - General

Key takeaways for IMII

Blue Hydrogen has risen to dizzy heights in recent years as a promising low-carbon fuel acrossthe world, and although many hydrogen energy systems are in the demonstration phase, themining sector is set to be an early adopter. There's a strong drive to decarbonize miningoperations. Hydrogen can be used to store renewable energy to generate electricity, it can powerequipment and trucks and cars, and it can even be used in certain mining processes as areductant.

Page 18: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 18

Conclusion

According to the analysis, TDM could be a cost efficient technology in small or medium industrialscale on-site H₂ production. Even though the centralized H₂ production by SMR is a relativelyinexpensive method, the need for transportation would raise the H₂ production cost by 25.96–59USD/MWh H₂.A break-even value for the TDM product carbon was found as 310 EUR/tC in the current marketsituation and 280 EUR/tC in a potential market situation in 2030 above which TDM would beeconomically competitive with SMR.The break-even value for the TDM product carbon is less than the current market price of carbonblack that vary between 590 USD/t and 2360 USD/t.The H₂ produced by TDM has the lowest specific CO₂ emissions in this study (40 kg CO₂/MWh H₂).The CCS coupling reduces the CO₂ emissions from the H₂ production by SMR, but loweremissions than in TDM cannot be achieved if CO₂ is captured exclusively from the syngas.Additional CO₂ capture from the furnace flue gas would reduce the emissions in SMR but wouldcause additional costs that were not taken into account in this study.The specific CO₂ emissions from electrolysis are highly dependent on the electricity generationtechnology, and thus, using any other power source except renewable electricity for electrolysiscauses unacceptably high specific CO₂ emissions.The advantages of TDM are the ability to utilize the current natural gas network for the feedstocksupply and a good feedstock availability that enables demand-driven H₂ production.

Blue Hydrogen - Life Cycle Assessment

Page 19: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 19

Other Information

The current state-of-the-art technology for capturing CO₂ from an SMR Based H₂ plant where CO₂is captured from the shifted syngas using MDEA solvent consumes about 14.67 MJ/Nm3 H₂ andcaptures around 56% of the total CO₂ emitted (avoiding around 54% CO₂ as compared to withoutCCS).The LCOH would $16 cents/Nm3 which is about $ 2.5 c€/Nm3 higher compared to SMR withoutCCS. The increase in the LCOH is predominantly contributed by the increase in CAPEX and cost ofNG consumption; and the loss of revenues from sale of electricity.

References:

1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.12.0632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.15333. https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/hydrogen-production/energy-briefing-green-hydrogen.pdf

Blue Hydrogen - Life Cycle Assessment

Key takeaways for IMII

Steam reforming is a well-established thermochemical process used for converting natural gas tohydrogen and syngas. The steam reforming process is however constraint with challenges suchas catalyst deactivation, the high thermal energy required for steam generation and to initiate thereaction and the emissions of CO₂. Research attention has focused on other emergingthermochemical processes such as the CO₂ reforming of methane, partial oxidation reforming,autothermal reforming, and photocatalytic reforming to overcome the challenges associated withthe steam reforming. The values presented in this study fit with those considered by other keystudies in Europe done by the Royal Society for the UK.

Page 20: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 20

Overview

Three alternative technologies for hydrogen production have been summarized in this section. While theProton Process (developed by Canadian company Proton Technologies), is on its way tocommercialization, the photobiological and thermochemical water splitting technologies are still underlab-scale/prototype testing stages and require some more research before commercialization is possible.

At a

gla

nce

Alternative Hydrogen Generation methods - General

Alternative H₂technology 1

Underground Coal Gasification

Advantage Suitable for Canada as it has many abandoned oil and gas fields which can be tapped for H₂ generation, once constructed and running, there are no emissions

Hurdles Existing hydrogen transport infrastructure will have to be figured out if oil field is not close to mining site (for energy use)

Alternative H₂technology 2

Photobiological water splitting (TRL 5)

Advantage Simple bioreactor that uses algal waste and lignocellulostic as feedstocks, sunlight, microorganisms are abundant, new strains of microbes which will increase efficiency and hydrogen production are being studied

Hurdles Hydrogen production rates and efficiencies need to be improved for large-scale deployment

Alternative H₂technology 3

Thermochemical water splitting (TRL 5-6)

Advantage uses only high temperatures (could be from CSP or SMR) and chemical reactions to produce hydrogen from water. potential for large-scale, with low or no GHG emissions

Hurdles Durability of reactant materials for thermochemical cycling need to be improved

Relevance to mining

These emerging methods can all be applied to mining industry for electricity production (through hydrogen used in fuel cells)

Page 21: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 21

Other Information

Another method is the photoelectrochemical splitting of water (using sunlight and specializedsemiconductor materials to split water), although, it appears that continued improvements inefficiency, durability, and cost are still needed for market viability. Additionally, RE liquidreforming (using biofuels like ethanol with steam reforming) could also be employed which issimilar to the natural gas reforming process. Research is being done to identify better catalysts toimprove yields and selectivity together with ways to reduce CAPEX and OPEX costs [7,8].

References:

1. Proton Energy, 20202. Avenue Magazine, 20203. Russian Science Foundation and others, 20154. US DoE [Link1]5. University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 20206. US DoE [Link2]7. US DoE [Link3]8. US DoE [Link4]

Alternative Hydrogen Generation methods - General

Key takeaways for IMII

Apart from green hydrogen (which is currently booming) and conventional production methods,alternative hydrogen generation methods such as the proton energy process, photobiologicalwater splitting and thermochemical water splitting are also being considered by the scientific andcorporate community. Although not yet commercialized at industrial scale, researchers indicatethat these will be potentially cost-effective as well as non-polluting. These methods depend highlyon successful research progress and need to be monitored closely for future use.

Page 22: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Policy Framework in Canada

22

Overview

The Government of Canada has released a National Hydrogen Strategy in Dec 2020 [1]. This wasdone in consultation with Canadian Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association (CHFCA) and otherstakeholders such as industry partners, educational institutes, NGOs and funding organizations.CHFCA represents the majority of stakeholders in Canada's hydrogen and fuel cell sector.Another stakeholder is the Hydrogen Canada Strategic Research Network (H₂CAN) which is pan-Canadian research network of 29 leading researchers including NSERC (Natural Sciences andEngineering Research Council of Canada) chair holders and scientists and engineers from leadingresearch centers and labs like NRC (National Research Council) and CanMet lab (CanadianCentre for Mineral and Energy Technology) [2].The Canadian government has committed $1.5 billion towards fostering a future hydrogeneconomy for the country. The Strategy intends to help the mining industry through the adoption ofhydrogen-powered heavy vehicles and microgrid power systems for stationary operations.

At a

gla

nce Target

(GW):20 Mt of H₂/y @ cost of $ 1.5-3.5/kg H₂ Target (year): 2050

Financial support:

$1.5 billion - Tax exemptions, Government incentives, grants, and clean vehicle rebates

Applicability of support:

All sectors (value chain, equipment manufacturers, transportation) can apply. Mining sector is encouraged.

Hurdles: Lack of transport and distribution infrastructure, robust regulations and industry standards, high generating costs

Incentivization compared to Europe:

Comparable to EU (after release of strategy)

Page 23: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Canada H₂ Policy Framework

23

The Government of Canada has released aNational Hydrogen Strategy in Dec 2020,done in consultation with Canadian Hydrogenand Fuel Cell Association (CHFCA) and otherstakeholders.

High Carbon Intensity

Low Carbon Intensity

The Government has committed $1.5 billion towards fostering a future hydrogen economy for the country through the Low-carbon and Zero-emissions Fuels Fund.

Page 24: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 24Figure showing the cost of blue and green H₂ production in different countries

Page 25: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Small Modular Reactors

25

Page 26: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 26

Overview

As opposed to large scale nuclear plants, small modular reactors (SMRs) have been developed toreduce the total capital costs with shorter lead times and technologies that improve the operatingflexibility of nuclear power plants to allow for the integration with renewable capacity into theelectricity system.Due to lowering capital costs, R&D and investment in SMRs and other advanced reactors arebeing encouraged through public-private partnerships (currently mainly in the US)SMR technology is very relevant for the mining industry (also mentioned in the Canadian SMRRoadmap released in 2018 [1]) and is set to reach commercialization in the next few decades.

Applicability: Electricity Generation TRL: 5-8

Cost 0.085 $/kWh (2020) 0038-0.067 $/kWh (2030/40)

Carbon Footprint:

~ 4-8.7 gCO₂/kWh (2020) expected to reduce by 2035

Scale: Upto 190 MWth (2020) -upto 300 MWth (2030/40)

Hurdles: Lack of safety certifications and regulations, high R&D costs (US DoE has invested $ 317 million in R&D already)Advantages: Higher operational flexibility, potential for use of

innovative fuels, safer, cheaper than conventional nuclear, more compatible with renewables

At a

gla

nce

Small Modular Reactors

Page 27: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 27

Key takeaways for IMII

As the supply of RE grows, SMRs are expected to handle its intermittent nature much better asthey are easier to turn on and leave running.Canada’s SMR Action Plan (was set to release in the fall of 2020) will provide more details [12].Comprehensive list of the proposed SMR designs/lab-scale modelling and operational prototypeswas published by IAEA in Sep 2020 [13].

Small Modular Reactors

References:1. Canadian Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Roadmap Steering Committee, 20202. International Energy Agency, 20193. Carnegie Mellon University, 20164. SMR Roadmap Technology working group, 20185. Carbon Brief (UK based website), 20176. Department of Civil EngineeringAalto University, Finland, 20207. World Nuclear Association, 20208. Nuclear Energy Agency, 20169. Ontario Newsroom, Office of the Premier, 201910. Yale School of Environment, 202011. NuScale Power YouTube, 201812. Government of Canada, 202013. International Atomic Energy Agency, 2020

Page 28: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

SMR’s development in Canada: Overview

28

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Started Process of licensing

Plant startsoperations at Chalk River

Construction FOAK

UBATTERY FOAK Operational

Technology demonstration starts*

Projected to deployment

Construction Demo Unit

Plant operative

Plant operative

Vendors that are more closely to deploy their technology in Canada have been analyzed.The roadmap of their developments shows that the technology will be ready by 2030

Saskatchewan government fully on board with SMRs

The Minister of Environment is the lead for Saskatchewan, and issupported by a new Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Unit in the ClimateChange and Adaptation Division that is responsible for coordinating aprovincial approach with other ministries and SaskPower.

Page 29: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

SMR’s Capacity

29

Blue = High-Temperature He-Cooled SMR Black = Heat Pipe-Cooled SMR Purple = Lead-Cooled SMR Green = Integral Pressurized Heavy Water SMR Red = Liquid metal (Sodium) cooled fast reactor

Design considers grouping reactors to achieve higher scale, which could be beneficial to never shut it down entirely and hence having always energy availability

Micro-Modular SMR

Page 30: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

SMR Levelized Cost of Electricity and Fuel Type

30

LCOE ($/kWh)

(300MWe)0.084

Fuel

Typ

e

0.173 0.34 (3 MWe)(10 MWe)

(77 MWe)0.065

(20 MWe)0.18

(4 MWe)0.09

TRISO

TRISO

TRISO

Enriched uranium

nitride

MOX

Metallic uranium

alloy

TRISO

(100 MWe)0.05

(5 MWe)0.20Saskatchewan current

SK oil field rate

In general vendors suggest a higher price point than current one for electricity, but this could change if:● Carbon Tax is applied● Combination of heat and

Electricity is supplied

Page 31: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 31

Overview

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) regulates all nuclear activities and facilities inCanada. The CNSC is also in charge of regulating the operation of SMRs (although licenses havenot yet been issued to any companies yet).Through the pre-licensing vendor design review process, the CNSC provides assessments to SMRvendors so that they can meet the regulatory requirements and identify potential design issues atearly stages. Based on this initial assessment, vendors can submit a licence application.Applications for SMRs follows the same procedures as an application for any other nuclearfacility. The CNSC’s primary role is to ensure that an applicant can demonstrate they will operatetheir reactor safely.

Regulatory Landscape SMR in CanadaA

t a g

lanc

e Regulatory body: Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC)

Main Regulations for SMRs:

REGDOC-2.5.2, Design of Reactor Facilities: Nuclear Power Plants, Design of Small Reactor Facilities (RD-367)

Permits required: Vendor license for operating a nuclear facility

Timeline: Vendor Design Review process Phase 1 takes 12-18 months, Phase 2 takes 24 months. Licensing application is variable but includes a 4 month long public hearing and 3 month decision period

Advantages: Pre-licensing Vendor Design Review (VDR) process by CNSC helps companies identify regulatory lapses early on in thedesign stages

Hurdles: Obtaining a license can take a long time and is dependent on many factors that are reactor and location specific, gaining public acceptance could be tricky

Page 32: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 32

Key takeaways for IMII

It appears that the regulatory framework for obtaining an SMR license from the Canadian NuclearSafety Commission is clear and streamlined but is very time-intensive. The pre-licensing vendordesign review (VDR) process, provides a lot of value addition to SMR vendors so that they canbetter understand the regulatory requirements and identify potential design issues early on duringthe design process. Going by the list of companies under a VDR service agreement currently, itcan be seen that many of them are taking advantage of this process (since irrespective of thereactor design, if the regulations are not in sync, it is better for the vendor to know this in the earlydesign stage). Although no SMR licenses have been issued yet, many vendors and companies arein various stages of the VDR assessment process. SK seems to be suitable for location-specificCNSC regulations. The hurdles appear to be in the long timelines required for a license to beissued and gaining public acceptance for the set up of the facilities.

References:

1. CNSC, SMRs, 20202. CNSC, Prelicensing VDR, 20203. University of Regina, SK, 20214. CNSC, RD-367, 20145. CNSC compliance, 20156. CNSC, SMRs, 20197. CNSC, 20198. CNSC New Reactor FAQs, 20209. SK Govt., 201910. Nuclear Safety Act, CNSC, 2021

Regulatory Landscape SMR in Canada

Page 33: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Carbon Capture

33

Page 34: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 34

Overview

By incorporating a “utilization” option within a “storage” concept, captured CO₂ can be used as afeedstock for making products, products in which CO₂ gas is sequestered permanently. Thisunison is known as carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) [1]. CCUS is the only group oftechnologies that contributes both to reducing emissions in key sectors directly and to removingCO₂ to balance emissions that are challenging to avoid – a critical part of “net” zero goals [1, 2].

Applicability: Heating and steam generation TRL: 4-8

Cost $65/t (2020) (Power generation) $50/t (2040) (Power generation)

Carbon Footprint:

14–20% mitigation of total anthropogenic CO₂ emissions in 2050

Scale: 1.9 Mt/y (2020) - 3.12 Mt/y (2025) Hurdles: There is no benchmark against which costs of new technologies or improvements to current technologies can be made, making the choice of technology less clear for investors.

Advantages: CCUS contributes both to reducing emissions directly and to removing CO₂ to balance emissions that cannot be avoided.

At a

gla

nce

Carbon capture, storage and utilization

Page 35: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Carbon Capture Technologies: Overview

35

Post-combustion Capture

Refers to capturing CO2 from a flue gas generated after combustion of a carbon-based fuel (i.e. coal, natural gas).

Pre-combustion Capture

Removes CO2 from fossil fuels (oxidation and water shift reaction) before combustion is complete.

Direct Air CaptureOxy-Fuel

CombustionOxygen is separated prior to combustion, the fuel is combusted in diluted oxygen from flue gas giving flue gas rich in CO2 and H2O, resulting in easier separation of CO2(used mainly in coal combustion)

Calcium Looping

Ca is reversibly reacted between its

carbonate form (CaCO3) and its

oxide form (CaO) to separate CO2 from other gases (used mainly by cement manufacturers)

Absorption Adsorption Membrane

Carbon Capture Technologies

Page 36: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

TRL and Cost

36

TRL

$/ton of Captured CO2

MembranesHurdles:Tend to be more suitable for high-pressure processes such as IGCC, fouling and long-term stability of thin selective layer. Polymeric membranes can suffer from short lifetimes

$27 $54$42

$40 $45

SorbentsHurdles:Heat management in solid systems is difficult, pressure drop can be large in flue gas applications which leads to decrease in efficiency

2nd Gen Amine based solutionsHurdles:Solvent losses and make-up costs may affect the CAPEX/OPEX, Need to validate dynamic models with pilot data

Clear Skyline Project Startups in

Canada

Page 37: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Supplementary Information

37

Page 38: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) technology

Thermal Energy Storage (TES) technologies

Redox Flow Battery in Salt Caverns

UPHS technologies

38

Page 39: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 39

Overview

Process heat demand is one of the major energy consuming processes within the miningindustry. The growing renewable energy industry has mainly been focused on electricityproduction and grid integration, while technology solutions designed for other industrialprocesses are still nascent. Unlike photovoltaic (PV) panel technologies, Concentrated SolarPower (CSP) has an inherent capacity to store heat energy for limited intervals of time for laterconversion into electricity [1].

Applicability: Heating TRL: 5-9

Cost $0.29 (2020) - $0.05/Kilowatt-Hour (2030) Carbon Footprint:

Emissions are in the range of 15-20 gCO₂eq/kWh

Scale: 550 ºC (2020) - >1000 ºC (2030)4.9 GW (2017) - need to reach 8GW (2030)

Hurdles: An impediment is the availability of land where to establish renewable energy facilities. Another limitation is the distance required of the CSP plants and the consumption site. High water requirements.

Advantages: The use of CSP technology could help to reduce fossil fuel dependency in high-temperature process for heat production. In contrast to Photovoltaic energy, CSP can be stored.

At a

gla

nce

Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) technology

Page 40: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 40

Other Information

CSP water requirements are relatively high: about 3 000 L/MWh [1]. The NREL claimed thatmining operations that require fossil fuels as a feedstock are usually hard to fully decarbonizewith current renewable technologies. Technology advancement is still needed to allow for higherpenetration levels. The renewable installation by mining companies has increased from 42 MW ofannual installation in 2008 to 3,397 MW of annual installations in 2019 [1].

Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) technology

Key takeaways for IMII

The use of renewable energy technology can reduce the need for carbon-based energy use atmines. Particularly, Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) technology is showing promising results butwill require larger land availability and sufficient solar resources.

References:1. NREL. 20202. Energysage. 2019.3. Simona, 20194. IEA. 2020.5. NREL, 2019

Page 41: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 41

Overview

Thermal Energy Storage (TES) is an established concept for balancing the mismatch in demandand supply for heating or cooling, offsetting differences in time and magnitude of heat/coolingproduction. TES can help improve system performance by balancing supply and demand andsystem temperature fluctuations, as well as improving the reliability of the heating and/or coolingsource. TES supports the wider take-up of renewable heating in particular interseasonal storageof solar heat and the electrification of heat using heat pumps coupled with thermal storagetechnologies [1].

Applicability: Heating and cooling applications. Replacing gas-based heating.

TRL: 9 (TTES - Tank systems) and 1 (THS -Thermochemical Heat Storage)

Cost 25 - 90 USD/kWh (2018) - <15 - 160 USD/kWh (2030)

Carbon Footprint:

Currently, information is limited to the development and global deployment of the technology and not in the environmental impact.

Scale: TES with CSP - Energy density 2018: Sensible: 70 -200 kWh/m³; Latent: 30-85 kWh/m³; and Thermochemical: 800-1200 kWh/m³. 2030: Sensible: Value dependent on the material selection. For latent and thermochemical, there aren't projected changes.

Advantages: TES reduces the need for costly grid reinforcements, helps to balance seasonal demand and supports the shift to a predominantly renewable-based energy system.

Hurdles: Market barriers: For PCM products, upper end TRL of available technologies still lack of proper supply chain. Low renewable heat penetration.

At a

gla

nce

Thermal Energy Storage (TES) technologies

Page 42: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 42

Other Information

One of the main objectives of lowering the Levelized cost of electricity of CSP is to reduce thecost of the thermal storage asset employed by the plant. Furthermore, to improve the overalleconomics of the plant, one of the principal objectives is to increase the operating temperature.High operating temperatures improve the thermal-to-electric efficiencies of CSP plants [5].

Thermal Energy Storage (TES) technologies

Key takeaways for IMII

One potential option to reduce emissions from process heat is to displace natural gas withrenewables coupled with thermal energy storage (TES). Investments to drive technologicaldevelopment and measures to enhance market pull, combined with a holistic energy policy aimedat scaling up renewables and decarbonising energy use, can unlock rapid growth in TESdeployment.

References:1. Delta Energy & Environment Ltd. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/

attachment_data/file/545249/DELTA_EE_DECC_TES_Final__1_.pdf2. NREL. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/76156.pdf3. Barbara Hardy Institute. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148118308826?via%3Dihub4. DIOPMA. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.01.0505. IRENA. https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Nov/Innovation-outlook-Thermal-energy-storage

Page 43: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 43

Overview

Redox flow battery technology basically stores energy in liquid electrolytes. When theseelectrolytes are based on recyclable polymers which can dissolve in salt water, they can be usedin salt caverns (which acts as the reservoir) to form really large-scale environment-friendlybatteries (up to GWh capacities). This technology is currently being developed by researchers atthe University in Jena and a system is under construction by a German utility subsidiary company,EWE, under the “brine4power” project in Germany. It is expected to be operational by 2023. Thereis also another pilot plant being developed for testing in Germany by a gas storage company(RWE).

Redox Flow Battery in Salt CavernsA

t a g

lanc

e Relationship to mining:

Energy storage TRL: 5-6

Cost: Data not available Carbon Footprint: No emissions

Scale: 700 MWh at an output of 120 MW (2023 - planned year of operation) Potentially scalable to GWh level depending on size of salt cavern (2030/40)

Advantages: Useful in situations that require regular cycling throughout the day (like with RE sources), environmentally friendly, high efficiency, long duration storage, potentially low costs, non-flammable, components can be recycled

Hurdles: Still in development stages, cost data not available, only two plants are currently under construction so not much overall data is known yet

Page 44: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected] 44

Other Information

Apart from the technological aspects, the policy aspect is also important for this technology.Currently, in Germany, there is a lack of a definition and legal framework for large-scale energystorage facilities. Under energy laws, only NG storage sites are defined as “storage facilities”.This means that the battery energy storage facilities are currently classified as energy end-users,and therefore operators are generally required to pay all end-user fees such as the network fee,RE levy and electricity tax in order to operate the storage facility or connect it to the grid (forcharging) [6].

References:

1. Friedrich Schiller University News, 20202. Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, 20203. TechXplore, 20174. New Atlas, 20175. ReCharge, 20206. EWE Gasspeicher, 2020

Redox Flow Battery in Salt Caverns

Key takeaways for IMII

Most of the companies (utilities in Germany) that are exploring this technology are ones thatalready own salt caverns which are currently used for NG storage. This technology seems tomake more sense for utility-scale projects and grid power balancing as a long duration storageapplication rather than for specific industry-scale applications. But given that SK has many saltmines, this is definitely an important technology to look out for in the coming decade as it haspotential to be integrated with the grid. It could subsequently also help drive the mining industryby aiding with clean energy storage and supply.

Page 45: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

1. The UPHS technology was developed in 2010 by JolTech ApS. The UPHS stores energy by lifting a mass of soil through the pumping of water into an underground cavity. The cavity is formed by two impermeable membranes welded along the edges. The technology is based on both visco-elastic and plastic effects for the cyclic loading of the soil.

The field test in Denmark indicated that the technology would be very close to produce a full scale system of 30MW power and 200 MWh capacity (similar to traditional Pump Hydro Storage). Unfortunately, the company andpartners disappeared and cannot be linked to any additional project.

Underground Pumped Hydroelectric Storage

45

UPHS technology

Page 46: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

2. Quidnet Energy (US startup) has developed a variant of UPHS known as “Geomechanical Pumped Storage” AModular system that can be deployed across diverse geographic areas on small footprints. 1-10 MW modules.

Underground Pumped Hydroelectric Storage

46

Geomechanical Pumped Storage technology

Page 47: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Next Steps

47

Page 48: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

Next Steps

48

For any requests, we welcome your additional questions and custom building a solution for you.

WE CAN ALSO DO THE FOLLOWING

✔CONFERENCE SUPPORT: Attend conferences of interest on your behalf.

✔WRITING ARTICLES: Write technical or more public facing articles on your behalf.

✔WORKING WITH A CONTRACT RESEARCH ORGANIZATION: Engage with a CRO to build a prototype, test equipment or any other related research service.

COMPETITIVE INTELLIGENCE

TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING

TECHNOLOGY & PATENT LANDSCAPING

MARKET RESEARCH & ANALYSIS

TRENDS MAPPING DATA ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS

REVIEW BEST PRACTICES

PATENT COMMERCIALIZATION STRATEGY

ACQUIRE NON-PUBLIC INFORMATION

SUPPLIER OUTREACH & ANALYSIS

CONSULT WITH INDUSTRY SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS

INTERVIEWING COMPANIES & EXPERTS

SOME POSSIBILITIES THAT PRESCOUTER CAN OFFER FOR CONTINUATION OF OUR RELATIONSHIP

Page 49: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

TRL Rating Scale

49

The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Scale is an industry standardized metric by which PreScouter evaluatestechnologies for each client. Based on the constraints on the innovation challenge, PreScouter assigns a TRLnumber to each identified academic, company or patent.

This process allows each solution to be easily identified for commercialization potential.

Higher number TRL’s do not always equate to the best technology – for example, most late stage academictechnology is best suited for optimization and integration, but would have a TRL between 2-4.

TRL 9 Systems operation - Actual system operated over full range of expected conditions

TRL 8 System commissioning - Actual system completed and qualified through demonstrate tests

TRL 7 System commissioning - Full-scale, similar prototype demonstration in relevant environment

TRL 6 Technology demonstration - Engineering / pilot scale prototype testing in relevant environment

TRL 5 Technology development - Lab-scale validation in relevant environment

TRL 4 Technology development - Component or system validation in lab environment

TRL 3 Research to prove feasibility - Analytical/experimental test of critical function - proof of concept

TRL 2 Basic technology research - Technology concept and/or application formulated

TRL 1 Basic technology research - Basic principles observed and reported

Page 50: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

PreScouter, Technical Director, Materials & Natural Resources

Christian Salles

About the Authors

50

Professional Summary:Christian is one of PreScouter's Technical Directors. He has helped many clients in the Natural Resources andEnergy vertical by bringing solutions that align with their sustainability, efficiency and financial goals. He ensuresPreScouter clients receive the latest insights into any disruptive or ground-breaking technologies within CarbonCapture & Utilization, Waste Management, Biofuel Developments, O&G, Mining, Renewable Energy generation andstorage, among others. Christian has a background in Materials Engineering and Science and brings toPreScouter years of experience in the energy industry in aging management, failure analysis and testing, as wellas technical consultancy and troubleshooting for special alloys manufacturing.

Page 51: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

About the Authors

51

Syracuse University, United States

National Autonomous University of Mexico

Jorge Hurtado Yutzil Castan Srilakshmi Gopal

KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden

Dusica Radjenovic Mohammed Shafi

Freie Universität Berlin, Germany

Kerala University, India

Page 52: Reducing GHG in Uranium and Potash Mining: 2030-2040

+1.872.222.9225 • [email protected]

About PreScouter

52

PreScouter helps clients gain competitive advantage by providing customized global research. We act as anextension to your in-house research and business data teams in order to provide you with a holistic view of trends,technologies, and markets.

Our model leverages a network of 3,000+ advanced degree researchers at tier 1 institutions across the globe to tapinto information from small businesses, national labs, markets, universities, patents, startups, and entrepreneurs.

CLIENTS RELY ON US FOR:

Innovation Discovery: PreScouter provides clients with a constant flow of high-value opportunities and ideas by keeping you up to date on new and emerging technologies and businesses.

Privileged Information: PreScouter interviews innovators to uncover emerging trends and non-public information.

Customized Insights: PreScouter finds and makes sense of technology and market information in order to help you make informed decisions.

PRESCOUTER PROVIDES CUSTOMIZED RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

500+CLIENTSWORLDWIDE

4,000+RESEARCH REPORTS CREATED

150,000+HOURS OF RESEARCHCOMPLETED FOR CLIENTS